Mobile phones have long supported relatively awkward text input using a numeric keypad, for text messaging. Other classes of pocketsize hand-held devices have attempted to allow richer text input, for tasks such as, but not limited to, email and Internet access. These devices have generally either required the user to enter text using a stylus or by pressing keys on an attached or embedded mechanical QWERTY keyboard (e.g. a miniature version of the keyboard used on computers). (The terms “mechanical” and “physical” will be used interchangeably in the context of describing keyboards here—as a means to distinguish such keyboards from “virtual” keyboards” as described below.)
When using a stylus, either the user draws letters on the touch screen of the device with the device using handwriting recognition software to determine what the user is writing, or the user taps images of keys on a virtual keyboard image on the device's display. In each case, using a stylus to write or tap out letters tends to be relatively slow and awkward. Two examples of devices that require a stylus for text input are, without limitation, the Palm Vx (among other older Palm devices) and the newer Nokia 770 Internet Tablet.
Devices that include small physical keyboards on which users type using their thumbs, such as, but not limited to, Blackberry devices from Research in Motion and some more recent Treo devices from Palm One, have proven to be popular among people who frequently want to type on pocket-sized, handheld devices, at least in part because thumb-typing on these miniature typewriter-like mechanical keyboards (often called “thumb-boards”) has proven to be relatively fast and comfortable for people who already know how to type on full-size computer keyboards or typewriters. People generally find using mechanical thumb-boards to be significantly faster and easier than using a stylus to tap keys on a virtual keyboard or to draw characters for a device's handwriting recognition software. And they find it much easier than typing text on standard phone keypads.
However, there are a number of negative results from including these mechanical thumb-boards. The extra dozens of buttons and electronics that comprise these mechanical keyboards increase the cost, size, weight, and thickness of devices. Also, it increases the likelihood of something breaking on those devices compared to devices that do not include the extra buttons and electronics. Attaching or embedding a tiny computer-like keyboard makes those devices look more intimidating and less consumer-friendly, compared to other famously consumer-friendly devices that do not have mechanical keyboards, such as, but not limited to, Apple Computer's iPod. Also, a mechanical thumboard makes the form-factor and grip awkward if a user wants use their thumbs to select items on the display of the device.
Herein the terms “virtual keyboard”, “virtual thumboard”, and “onscreen keyboard” are used interchangeably, except where otherwise noted. It also uses the terms “mechanical keyboard”, “mechanical thumboard”, “physical keyboard”, and “physical thumboard” interchangeably, except where otherwise noted. The word “thumboard” can also be spelled “thumbboard”, with two “b”s, or “thumb-board”.
There have been a few prior attempts to allow thumb-typing on handheld electronic devices, including, but not necessarily limited to, the following software: SPB's Full Screen Keyboard, Kilmist's Keyboard XL, Previsionary Inc.'s Typango, Indigo Softworx's Thumboard 1.1, and Fortune Fountain Ltd's Dialkey and other virtual keyboards. These solutions use QWERTY keyboard layouts (though not necessarily standard straight-rowed QWERTY keyboard layouts), and their virtual keyboard images go away when not in use, so their appearances, and the appearances of the devices they run on, can be more consumer friendly than devices with attached mechanical thumboards. However, none of the prior virtual thumboard solutions come very close to allowing users to type text as fast and comfortably as users can type on today's highly regarded handheld devices with mechanical thumboards, especially for people with above average hand size. New users, in particular, experience excessive errors or awkwardness when they pick up the device for the first time and start typing, compared to typing on a device with a mechanical thumboard. For mainstream consumers, that last point is typically more relevant. People will often get better at operating a device as they practice using it repeatedly over time, even if it is hard to use initially. However, if the first impression is bad and the experience fails to live up to users' expectations immediately, mass-market consumer adoption is unlikely. Another downside to these full-screen virtual thumb-boards is that, in an attempt to maximize accuracy, they generally fill the device screen with the keyboard layout from top to bottom, as well as side-to-side allowing users to see just a few words at a time of the text the user is typing, and leaving no room to see the larger context of the Web page or application into which the user is typing.
Some examples of typical reactions from people who evaluated prior virtual thumboards are as follows. Julio Ortiz wrote in a review on PDALive.com, “Don't expect to type on Typango (or any of the full screen keyboards for that matter) as fast as you do on a regular keyboard or thumboard.” Young Joo wrote on AximSite.com (a site devoted to Dell's Axim PocketPCs), “One of the downside of SPB FSK was the accuracy. I always had misspelled words.” In a review on the PDAGeek section of Geek.com, Joel Evans wrote, “ . . . I still find myself wanting either a full-blown hardware keyboard or a clip-on [mechanical] thumbboard.” Prior virtual thumboards simply have not lived up to user expectations, which have been formed in part by users' successful experience with mechanical thumboards. But the mechanical thumboards come with the negative side effects outlined above (e.g. size, weight, cost, extra breakable parts, intimidating look, etc).
Recently some companies have made a virtual thumb-board for mid-size tablet PCs. One aspect to note is that they generally have to lay out the keys in big curvy “dials”—this is on a large display (e.g. 7″ diagonal). Typing of such curvy layouts tends to be very non-intuitive as it usually requires a hunt and peck typing method, as if one has little or no experience typing on a QWERTY keyboard. One cause for this is that the keys are not where the brain expects them to be; i.e. in straight rows. For example, the T key may appear about where the B key appears on a normal keyboard, relative to the upper right or left corners of the keyboard. In addition, the large size of such keyboards typically makes it physically difficult to reach and activate each key. And when such devices additionally use touch-screens that require excessive finger activation force (as is common), then users often have to bend their thumbs awkwardly to get their thumbnails onto the target to apply sufficient force, which is quite uncomfortable compared to using thumb-pads. The large, counter-intuitive layout of such keys is likely an attempt to improve accuracy, which seems to suggest that the developers of those large curvy keyboards were not able to achieve high thumb-typing accuracy on smaller, more normal looking keyboard layouts. Moreover, typically, the graphic targets of the keys extend all the way out to the neighboring keys' graphic targets: This is not particularly problematic if very large graphic targets are used for the keys; however, it simply does not work if the keys must be made small enough to fit a full Qwerty keyboard on a pocket-size device (e.g., without limitation, on a display that is 5″-diagonal or smaller), because users will often inadvertently click a little outside of an intended graphic target area when the target area is small and when the user is clicking with a thumb, as discussed further below.
For example, Microsoft and some device partners (including Samsung) recently introduced a relatively large hand-held tablet computer, which they are calling an “ultra-mobile PC” or “UMPC”, that includes a large, non-standard, semi-circular, split keyboard upon which users can try to thumb-type. The keyboard software, named “DialKeys” was designed by a company named Fortune Fountain Ltd. Tests show that thumb-typing on that big tablet and the oddly shaped virtual thumb-board is much more awkward than thumb-typing on a good mechanical thumb-board (such as those on a Blackberry), which may be why the device also includes alternative text-input mechanisms and a stylus. In any case, the UMPCs are roughly 9″ wide with 7″-diagonal displays, far from “pocket-size”.
In view of the foregoing, there is a need for a virtual thumboard for small, handheld electronic devices that is easy to use and allows the user to type quickly, accurately, and comfortably for functions such as, but not limited to typing, information searching, and user interface (UI) controls. Furthermore, enabling fast, accurate, and comfortable thumb-typing on a virtual thumb-board on a pocket-size device in turn enables a new class of thumb-optimized touch-screen user interfaces.
Unless otherwise indicated illustrations in the figures are not necessarily drawn to scale.